On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 04:37:13PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Mon, 2018-08-20 at 16:01 +0200, Erik Skultety wrote:
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 03:37:41PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
- $PYTHON ./setup.py rpm + rm -f dist/*.tar.{{ archive_format }} + $PYTHON ./setup.py sdist + rpmbuild --clean --define "_topdir `pwd`/rpmbuild" -ta dist/*.tar.{{ archive_format }}
So what if you used a standard bdist_rpm command from distutils core, I believe $PYTHON ./setup.py bdist_rpm --bdist-base <foo> would be equal to your _topdir. Although, that's just what I've digested from distutils docs, so even though bdist_rpm has a plethora of options you can specify there can always be one we'll be missing :P
I haven't been able to find any bdist_rpm documentation that is not filed under Python 2, which leads me to believe it might not be as supported (if at all) under Python 3; moreover, the current documentation[1] seems to point to FPM as the preferred way to generate RPM packages, but that process doesn't looks like it involves spec files at all and bundle a whole lot of other stuff along with your actual software, so I'd say it's not really suitable for our purpose.
In any case, I would still prefer the two-step approach (dist plus rpmbuild) to building RPMs because it is consistent with what we do for all other build systems (autotools and Perl's Module::Build).
[1] https://packaging.python.org/overview/#operating-system-packages
Fair enough, Reviewed-by: Erik Skultety <eskultet@redhat.com>